for me its from Oracle to Netezza :) tables with 200 milion rows :)

a feature im waiting for a long time is being able to drop any pyodbc
connection and use it to query (orm) a db (using standard sql).
Would love to see that in 0.8 :P

On 14 jan., 16:19, Michael Bayer <[email protected]> wrote:
> An ETL (an acronym I keep forgetting, then I look it up, then I say, "oh 
> right I write three of those per week") is heavy on the flush side, assuming 
> the "E" part is from spreadsheets or something like that.    I made a few 
> fairly vast improvements to flush() efficiency in 0.7, they're fun to watch 
> in the logs.
>
> On Jan 14, 2011, at 4:28 AM, dusans wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > So the C extensions would be good for someone that would use it for an
> > ETL with a lot of data? :)
>
> > On 9 jan., 17:25, Michael Bayer <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> I remain a little nervous about the C extensions, not as much because the 
> >> current code is unreliable, but because I'd like there to be a whole lot 
> >> more C code here.   I've used the existing C extensions quite a bit and 
> >> done tons of profiling - they really don't account for the vast majority 
> >> of time spent in large ORM operations, and they don't do much for a 
> >> non-ORM app that emits a lot of statements.  They just cut down on an app 
> >> that is non-ORM and needs to fetch very large result sets.  
>
> >> Basically I'd need a resource that can do lots more C code for me, if not 
> >> myself since it just would take a huge block of extra time for me to get 
> >> into it, before I'd feel good about the C code overall and confident that 
> >> I can put out releases in a timely manner which would now require 100% 
> >> reliable C code.    
>
> >> The limitations of distutils are also troubling here.   In my own work 
> >> app, we use pip in conjunction with a Makefile and for the SQLAlchemy 
> >> install the flag is on in the Makefile.   In that regard the flag being 
> >> off by default doesn't feel like that big a deal to me personally.
>
> >> On Jan 9, 2011, at 3:33 AM, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
>
> >>> Hi Mike,
>
> >>> On 1/9/11 00:14 , Michael Bayer wrote:
> >>>> The majority of my time is now spent developing 0.7, which is nearly 
> >>>> ready for beta releases pending a few more little features I'd like to 
> >>>> try to get in.  0.7 is really exciting with its new event API, lots of 
> >>>> other nice touches and of course the most radical reduction in 
> >>>> callcounts we've had in a few years.
>
> >>> Has been there a decision on enabling the C extensions by default in 0.7, 
> >>> or is that still too controversial?
>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Wichert.
>
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> >>> "sqlalchemy" group.
> >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> >>> [email protected].
> >>> For more options, visit this group 
> >>> athttp://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> > "sqlalchemy" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> > [email protected].
> > For more options, visit this group 
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sqlalchemy" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sqlalchemy?hl=en.

Reply via email to